What was it about and what made you argue for so long? Did you win, did it conclude in anyway?

  • otp@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    I had a multi-week long argument with someone on Reddit who was convinced that racism is irrelevant and/or doesn’t exist because it’s a distraction from class warfare or something.

    I argued that yes, the rich are screwing us over, but racism still exists and is bad and you shouldn’t be racist.

    They made responses that were at least 3x as long as mine. They didn’t really ever say anything new, except to say that my points were wrong because class warfare. After they went on a rant in response to my comment to the effect of “it’s still not nice to pretend racism doesn’t exist”, I lost hope with this person.

    I started replying to them by mentioning something they said, then followed it up by copy-pasting some of my previous comments to them. I didn’t even read their essays. I started pawning off my replies to ChatGPT, and they’d reply every time. Unless they were also using an LLM and telling it to include typos and stuff, it looked like they were still vehemently arguing with me/ChatGPT.

    After a few weeks of almost daily replies, I gave a two-sentence reply where I admitted that I wasn’t even reading their replies because I thought their opinion was nonsense and the “conversation” had been going nowhere.

    I didn’t get a reply to that comment.

  • folaht@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    That the EU was morally better than the US. The posts got longer and longer. I gave up after realizing my latest post would be over 4000 words long.

  • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Don’t know, honestly, but what I do know is that if an argument on the internet lasts more than a couple replies neither party is “winning” in the end, if winning means convincing the other party.

      • absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Ok.

        Conspiracy theory:

        Autism isn’t real, it is a conspiracy to pathologise otherwise normal human behaviour, to sell vast amounts of pharmaceutical products. It’s targeted at kids, because they are less articulate and can’t effectively argue that there is nothing wrong with them. The really insidious part is that after a while the kids believe it.